Monday, August 06, 2007

Roy Hattersley vs John Stuart Mill

How lucky we are to be living in the 21st century and not the 19th! The poor Victorians had to make do with John Stuart Mill as a philoshoper, but we have Roy Hattersley.

Today's Guardian bills an article as follows:
Roy Hattersley: Much has changed since John Stuart Mill's time, and his views on freedom are no longer valid.
And what is Hattersley's argument when you turn to the article?
The first principle asserts that "all errors which (a man) is likely to commit against advice and warning, are far outweighed by the evil of allowing others to constrain him to what they deem his good". Only cranks believe that now.
Well, that about wraps it up for Mill. I hope Hattersley will go on to tackle Kant or Wittgenstein next week.

And to think that I had him down as a lard-arsed, failed politician who wrote embarrassingly unfunny books about his dog.


Paul Walter said...


Anonymous said...

I have it on good authority that in university philosophy departments up and down the country, texts by Mill are being removed from next term's undergraduate reading lists, and replaced with Hattesley's Collected Journalism.

Vindico said...

I also blogged this here

I disagree with virtually everything Roy says. He just doesn't have a clue.